Question Number: 20521

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/16/2008

RE: Rec, Select, High School High School

Joe Griego of Bishop, CA USA asks...

Okay, so I just finished my NFHS certification course. This has provided me with valuable experience as to why high school coaches tend to make absurd claims regarding play in any league that uses FIFA law, instead of NFHS 'rules.'

During the training, a fellow Intermediate AYSO referee (trained in FIFA law) asked how NFHS deals with tackles executed with 'careless, reckless, or excessive force' as we were trying to clarify differences between FIFA law and NFHS rules.

His answer really caught me off guard. He claimed, quite earnestly, that 'you can never call a foul if there is no contact between players.' I asked him specifically, as this differs from FIFA law, which has the 'careless/reckless/excessive force' clause for tackles, and no longer makes a distinction regarding contact.

We looked in the NFHS rule book, and no where are tackles even mentioned in the Direct Free Kick offenses. On Page 79 of the 2008-2009 NFHS Soccer Rules Book, in the chart that lists the differences between NFHS, NCAA-NISOA, and FIFA, it states that for a DFK, FIFA is 'Basically the same as NCAA, but also specifies also tackling an opponent to gain possession of ball by making contact with the opponent before touching the ball.'

I said that was incorrect, but the NFHS trainer said FIFA law explicitly states that contact must be made. Who is correct?

Thanks in advance,

Joe Griego
Bishop, CA

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

Last year, the wording in the Laws was, 'tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball'.

The 2008-09 version of the Laws simply says it is a foul if 'a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: //snip first six// tackles an opponent'.

This change was not made as an amendment to the Laws, but as part of the cleaning up and clarification of language that IFAB approved this year. In other words, the old language was misleading, and referees all along should have been evaluating all tackles on the careless/reckless/excessive scale - not just those tackles where the player was contacted before the ball was.

Note that unlike kicking, striking and tripping, 'attempts to tackle' is not a foul. So your NFHS instructor was somewhat correct in that contact must be made. Far too often, after a call, players would protest, 'But I got the ball!' Maybe with the new wording, in a decade or two we'll stop hearing that. I will admit though, that there's very little difference between an attempted trip and a missed tackle.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Under the new wording, the referee may punish a player that carelessly tackles an opponent. To me, that means there does not have to be contact. Furthermore, attempting a tackle studs up and missing would certainly endanger the safety of an opponent and that player should be sent off. I understand there's no such foul as attempts to tackle an opponent but I believe a tackle could be considered a foul without contact. Or as Ref Voshal rightly points out, there's little difference between a trip and a tackle so you could punish for attempting to trip an opponent

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

ATTEMPT to trip
ATTEMPT to kick
JUMP AT not ON an opponent
SEE any contact yet on these three fouls?
Just how close is a careless tackle to an attempt to trip or kick or jump?
If a player bales and jumps out of the way to avoide a tackle comming in low hot and heavy is it PIADM? Hard to see any reckless or excessive gesture whereby the grace of quick reflexes one is saved from dire straits.
Cheers